Blake Adams Sustainability Problems Debate Paper #2 25 October 2011 Is American Culture a Sustainability Problem? In the late 1800’s when John L. O’Sullivan coined the term “manifest destiny”, I don’t think anyone realized the importance of that concept and how it would impact America. Democrats at the time used this concept to promote the expansion of the states westward and progress the ideology of American willpower and politics. Much earlier, Thomas Paine wrote in his pamphlet Common Sense, “We have it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a new world is at hand.(1)” I don’t believe that either of these two influential men had any idea of how far these virtues would take us away from the correct path of developing our nation. But as we find ourselves closing in on the 250th anniversary of the United States, most citizens would agree we have strayed from the path that has gotten us here. Today our country is a superpower, a nation with extreme financial and military clout. This means we have instilled in our country the belief that we are better than other nations, that we have infinite resources, that we anyone person can strive for liberty and pursuit of happiness. Liberty is often misunderstood as political and/or spiritual freedom, but in reality it means financial freedom. Because of this we created a financial system that promotes overconsumption of goods and a market that constantly provides new products and services. The discussion of this paper will focus on whether the American culture is a sustainability problem, or rather if the individual characteristics of our culture (television, sports, automobile industry, music, military superiority, etc...) together promote a culture of excess and unsustainable practices. I will focus on how individualism and business play a role in sustainability in America, but I will mostly analyze how each part of American culture rates in terms of sustainability. In support of the argument that America’s culture is a sustainable problem a TED video Naomi Klein, a Canadian scientist, discussed the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and our addiction to fossil fuels are just one example of how our nation’s attitude is causing the world trouble. She focused on the fact that we let the disaster pass us by without really accepting the totality of the problem and are still ignoring the fact that it is still going on. She cited Rachel Carson, who understood and warned us about how the Silent Spring occurs without us hearing it. We believe that we create technology, which controls nature. But as the oil spill proved that wrong, we cannot control nature and we are being reminded that every day. Our arrogance in the lack of planning is the biggest problem when we approach technology and Klein advised that as a culture we have come way too far to gamble without a backup plan, without an exit strategy. Nowhere else can we find a better example of how overconfidence has created bigger problems than the current financial crisis. We have thrown more money into failing systems of finance because economists viewed this scenario as a new opportunity. She discussed the need for the precautionary principle. It is better to ere on the side of caution than to jump into something possibly catastrophic. Most of the time, we approach our ecological/ sustainable problems with a cost/benefit analysis which is inherently wrong. Instead we wait until the last minute to address the problem. Naomi stressed that greed and hubris are the Achilles heel of American culture. This causes us to become socially reckless. Our culture remains in the narrative of dichotomy, of good and evil, of control and balance, suggesting that we continue to believe that salvation is our destiny and that technology might grant us that. But we think that our resources are limitless and that more will always be there. “The earth always had limits but there were beyond our sights. (2)“ However we continue business as usual and we seek endless growth. We accelerate at the moment we need to slam on the breaks. But we will be saved, technology will do it. She proposed that we need new stories, a new circular narrative. An area where this TED speech fails to address the question of sustainability is in the fact that America has rebounded in difficult times and we are still here. Thus we have sustained ourselves for over 200 years and continue to seek a better status. This is undoubtedly the prime aspect of American culture, our resilience. Naomi Klein discussed the spraying of DDT and how towns went silent because we created the initiative to kill small things. Well, we certainly did but we no longer use DDT, and now we banned it completely. Also, in response to Klein’s claims that America is dismissive of the oil spill disaster in the Gulf, that is certainly not true. Perhaps the media’s attention and the public’s awareness of the continuing problem is lacking, but there is definite reverence among Americans. In support of the opposition in this argument, Ronald Reagan’s announcement for his candidacy for President Stresses how great America is and how our “Spirit” are reasons why we have succeeded in times of trouble. “I have also seen the great strength of this nation as it pulled itself up from that ruin to become the dominant force in the world. If you ever had any doubt of the government's inability to provide for the needs of the people, just look at the utter fiasco we now call ‘the energy crisis.(3)’" Reagan discusses the possibility of sustainable energies in the future but remained realistic in his approach to energy, relying upon coal and oil. But in general, this speech stressed the positivity of the American culture citing the past examples of how we persevered and sustained despite our problems. In short, when it matters most we change for the better. Well as succinct as this speech was, it failed to consider the symptoms that got America to that point in history. It was much like the patient trying to diagnose himself, failing to realize the insanity in doing so. Reagan blamed the government for it’s failures, but forgot to mention that we the people comprise the nation and controls market economics, consumption rates, and energy demands. He also failed completely when describing conservation as not an energy policy. Meaning, the concept of not using more is not America’s policy. This is a serious problem in terms of how the country approaches sustainability. In a WakeupAmerika.com paper describing America’s sustainability, the author describes how, “Unfortunately, our culture of persistent resource overexploitation, through which we have improved our condition and created our American way of life, is self-destructive. Our distorted, cornucopian worldview and its consequent dysfunctional, detritovoric resource utilization behavior, which have enabled our “success”, are also simultaneously eliminating the resources upon which our American way of life and our very existence depend. As a result, neither our American way of life nor its existing lifestyle attributes is sustainable.(4)” To back up this statement, much of the data surrounding our energy and agricultural use over the last 100 years is cited as well as a historical analysis of our habits all contribute to a really good argument that we are in fact not sustainable. But what it does rather is to redefine the word in the context of America. We are not able to sustain further, and we are simply sustaining the past mindsets of industrial revolutionary economics and ignoring the impending collapse. The time when America falls apart is when we will realize the entire time that we were never sustainable. My personal belief is that the American culture has thrived on the concept of excess and infinite resource and use. We were blesses with an abundance of resources and our current status in the world is certainly due to that fact. So, we wouldn’t be here today if it weren’t for that mentality. However, the financial institutions that exist today certainly would not have existed prior to the industrial revolution or World War 2. The last 60-70 years have brought about a new country, but maintaining past precepts. Also, as we enter the information age and media becomes more commonplace with our daily lives and we are exposed to more advertisements and thus the urge to buy, we will only stumble on into the world of materialism. When our economy failed during the Bush years his response to problem was to go shopping. The resistance to change is what will become our downfall. Today, we are a country that has accepted it’s errors but does nothing about them. We need to restructure wealth and create a smaller country, not like how the internet has, but creating more tighter fit communities that rely on it’s members for goods and services. The de-privatization of agriculture and a new organization to replace the failure that is the EPA are two things I would suggest we do. But we have never faced the obstacles we face today, and that is why I believe that American culture is a problem and cannot be sustained.
Sustainability Problems
Debate Paper #2
25 October 2011
Is American Culture a Sustainability Problem?
In the late 1800’s when John L. O’Sullivan coined the term “manifest destiny”, I don’t think anyone realized the importance of that concept and how it would impact America. Democrats at the time used this concept to promote the expansion of the states westward and progress the ideology of American willpower and politics. Much earlier, Thomas Paine wrote in his pamphlet Common Sense, “We have it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a new world is at hand.(1)” I don’t believe that either of these two influential men had any idea of how far these virtues would take us away from the correct path of developing our nation. But as we find ourselves closing in on the 250th anniversary of the United States, most citizens would agree we have strayed from the path that has gotten us here. Today our country is a superpower, a nation with extreme financial and military clout. This means we have instilled in our country the belief that we are better than other nations, that we have infinite resources, that we anyone person can strive for liberty and pursuit of happiness. Liberty is often misunderstood as political and/or spiritual freedom, but in reality it means financial freedom. Because of this we created a financial system that promotes overconsumption of goods and a market that constantly provides new products and services. The discussion of this paper will focus on whether the American culture is a sustainability problem, or rather if the individual characteristics of our culture (television, sports, automobile industry, music, military superiority, etc...) together promote a culture of excess and unsustainable practices. I will focus on how individualism and business play a role in sustainability in America, but I will mostly analyze how each part of American culture rates in terms of sustainability.
In support of the argument that America’s culture is a sustainable problem a TED video Naomi Klein, a Canadian scientist, discussed the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and our addiction to fossil fuels are just one example of how our nation’s attitude is causing the world trouble. She focused on the fact that we let the disaster pass us by without really accepting the totality of the problem and are still ignoring the fact that it is still going on. She cited Rachel Carson, who understood and warned us about how the Silent Spring occurs without us hearing it. We believe that we create technology, which controls nature. But as the oil spill proved that wrong, we cannot control nature and we are being reminded that every day. Our arrogance in the lack of planning is the biggest problem when we approach technology and Klein advised that as a culture we have come way too far to gamble without a backup plan, without an exit strategy. Nowhere else can we find a better example of how overconfidence has created bigger problems than the current financial crisis. We have thrown more money into failing systems of finance because economists viewed this scenario as a new opportunity. She discussed the need for the precautionary principle. It is better to ere on the side of caution than to jump into something possibly catastrophic. Most of the time, we approach our ecological/ sustainable problems with a cost/benefit analysis which is inherently wrong. Instead we wait until the last minute to address the problem. Naomi stressed that greed and hubris are the Achilles heel of American culture. This causes us to become socially reckless. Our culture remains in the narrative of dichotomy, of good and evil, of control and balance, suggesting that we continue to believe that salvation is our destiny and that technology might grant us that. But we think that our resources are limitless and that more will always be there. “The earth always had limits but there were beyond our sights. (2)“ However we continue business as usual and we seek endless growth. We accelerate at the moment we need to slam on the breaks. But we will be saved, technology will do it. She proposed that we need new stories, a new circular narrative.
An area where this TED speech fails to address the question of sustainability is in the fact that America has rebounded in difficult times and we are still here. Thus we have sustained ourselves for over 200 years and continue to seek a better status. This is undoubtedly the prime aspect of American culture, our resilience. Naomi Klein discussed the spraying of DDT and how towns went silent because we created the initiative to kill small things. Well, we certainly did but we no longer use DDT, and now we banned it completely. Also, in response to Klein’s claims that America is dismissive of the oil spill disaster in the Gulf, that is certainly not true. Perhaps the media’s attention and the public’s awareness of the continuing problem is lacking, but there is definite reverence among Americans.
In support of the opposition in this argument, Ronald Reagan’s announcement for his candidacy for President Stresses how great America is and how our “Spirit” are reasons why we have succeeded in times of trouble. “I have also seen the great strength of this nation as it pulled itself up from that ruin to become the dominant force in the world. If you ever had any doubt of the government's inability to provide for the needs of the people, just look at the utter fiasco we now call ‘the energy crisis.(3)’" Reagan discusses the possibility of sustainable energies in the future but remained realistic in his approach to energy, relying upon coal and oil. But in general, this speech stressed the positivity of the American culture citing the past examples of how we persevered and sustained despite our problems. In short, when it matters most we change for the better.
Well as succinct as this speech was, it failed to consider the symptoms that got America to that point in history. It was much like the patient trying to diagnose himself, failing to realize the insanity in doing so. Reagan blamed the government for it’s failures, but forgot to mention that we the people comprise the nation and controls market economics, consumption rates, and energy demands. He also failed completely when describing conservation as not an energy policy. Meaning, the concept of not using more is not America’s policy. This is a serious problem in terms of how the country approaches sustainability.
In a WakeupAmerika.com paper describing America’s sustainability, the author describes how, “Unfortunately, our culture of persistent resource overexploitation, through which we have improved our condition and created our American way of life, is self-destructive. Our distorted, cornucopian worldview and its consequent dysfunctional, detritovoric resource utilization behavior, which have enabled our “success”, are also simultaneously eliminating the resources upon which our American way of life and our very existence depend. As a result, neither our American way of life nor its existing lifestyle attributes is sustainable.(4)” To back up this statement, much of the data surrounding our energy and agricultural use over the last 100 years is cited as well as a historical analysis of our habits all contribute to a really good argument that we are in fact not sustainable. But what it does rather is to redefine the word in the context of America. We are not able to sustain further, and we are simply sustaining the past mindsets of industrial revolutionary economics and ignoring the impending collapse. The time when America falls apart is when we will realize the entire time that we were never sustainable.
My personal belief is that the American culture has thrived on the concept of excess and infinite resource and use. We were blesses with an abundance of resources and our current status in the world is certainly due to that fact. So, we wouldn’t be here today if it weren’t for that mentality. However, the financial institutions that exist today certainly would not have existed prior to the industrial revolution or World War 2. The last 60-70 years have brought about a new country, but maintaining past precepts. Also, as we enter the information age and media becomes more commonplace with our daily lives and we are exposed to more advertisements and thus the urge to buy, we will only stumble on into the world of materialism. When our economy failed during the Bush years his response to problem was to go shopping. The resistance to change is what will become our downfall. Today, we are a country that has accepted it’s errors but does nothing about them. We need to restructure wealth and create a smaller country, not like how the internet has, but creating more tighter fit communities that rely on it’s members for goods and services. The de-privatization of agriculture and a new organization to replace the failure that is the EPA are two things I would suggest we do. But we have never faced the obstacles we face today, and that is why I believe that American culture is a problem and cannot be sustained.
Citations
1) Paine, Thomas. "Common Sense." Independent Publication. 3.1 (1776): n. page. Web. 25 Oct. 2011. <http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/singlehtml.htm>.
2) Klein, Naomi, Perf. Naomi Klein: Addicted to Fossil Fuels. Dir. TED Conferences, LLC. Perf. Naomi Klein, . TED, 2010. Web. 25 Oct 2011. <http://www.ted.com/talks/naomi_klein_addicted_to_risk.html>. <http://www.ted.com/talks/naomi_klein_addicted_to_risk.html>.
3) Reagan, Ronald. "Reagan 2020: Official Announcement for Candidacy for President." Reagan 2020. Republican Party, 13/12/1979. Web. 25 Oct 2011. <http://reagan2020.us/speeches/candidacy_announcement.asp>.
WUA!, . "Wake Up Amerika: On American Sustianability." Wake Up Amerika. WUA, 2009. Web. 25 Oct 2011. <1)http://www.wakeupamerika.com/PDFs/On-American-Sustainability.pdf